If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Can someone please explain the Foundationless hype to me?

Originally Posted by WLC

Now if someone could find a viable way to decontaminate beeswax, then the debate would be over (and maybe small cell would have better chance).

Actually since we're on the topic of neonics I realized after my post yesterday that there is an easy way to remove / reduce it from the wax in your comb. The half life of most neonics can be up to three years when its not exposed to sunlight (since it has to hydrolyze to breakdown). However, when exposed to sun light, it photodegrades significantly (15 days in soil) and photodegrades extremely fast in water exposed to light (half life of only 4 hours)!

Based on that it would seem to me that the best way to reduce/remove the toxin from the wax is to regularly cycle out your comb using a solar wax melter to melt the wax (since it will rapidly photodegrade the neonic chemicals). The wax reintroduced to the hive would have significantly less neonic in it.

For those who are worried about the chemicals in the plastic wax coating, you could leave your new frames in a sunny window a week or two before putting it in your hive for the same effect.

Re: Can someone please explain the Foundationless hype to me?

Originally Posted by BayHighlandBees

Based on that it would seem to me that the best way to reduce/remove the toxin from the wax is to regularly cycle out your comb using a solar wax melter to melt the wax (since it will rapidly photodegrade the neonic chemicals). The wax reintroduced to the hive would have significantly less neonic in it.

you could leave your new frames in a sunny window a week or two before putting it in your hive for the same effect.

So, one would need to solar melt combs and then make their own foundation?

You aren't really serious about that last statement, are you? Brainstorming maybe? I do that all the time, hoping some wild idea will find merit.

Re: Can someone please explain the Foundationless hype to me?

Originally Posted by WLC

There was a wax proccessing outfit that claimed non chemical decontamination of beeswax a few years ago.

Does anyone know if such an operation still exists?

I don't know if they are, but imagine the cost/benefit analysis. What would it cost and who would be able to afford the expensive wax after the decontamination? Being the variety of chemicals showing up in wax, wouldn't one have troubles removing all of them w/out degrading the wax into some other thing other than wax? Whatever that would be.

Re: Can someone please explain the Foundationless hype to me?

One of the most surprising things to come out of the Penn state.work is the pollen.
They started trapping pollen because they thought they might find.neonocs (they tended not to find them except in extreme conditions)....instead they found high levels.of fluvalinate and.coumaphos in the trapped.pollen ...pollen that had never seen the inside of.a.hive. presumably this has to do.with the wetting of the pollen during collection.

Re: Can someone please explain the Foundationless hype to me?

Based on that it would seem to me that the best way to reduce/remove the toxin from the wax is to regularly cycle out your comb using a solar wax melter to melt the wax

That's exactly what I've been doing for years. But I just sell it. Anybody want to buy? I'm sure I can sufficiently jack up the price. I've been on the soap and candle market, but selling to nervous beekeepers could be far more lucrative.

Re: Can someone please explain the Foundationless hype to me?

So, one would need to solar melt combs and then make their own foundation?

You aren't really serious about that last statement, are you? Brainstorming maybe? I do that all the time, hoping some wild idea will find merit.

I'm suggesting putting your frames on a rotation (perhaps a 3 - 4 years) after which you melt the wax in a solar melter and give it back to the bees to use. Doesn't seem that far fetched or different than what a lot of beekeepers already do.

Re: Can someone please explain the Foundationless hype to me?

Originally Posted by deknow

One of the most surprising things to come out of the Penn state.work is the pollen.
They started trapping pollen because they thought they might find.neonocs (they tended not to find them except in extreme conditions)....instead they found high levels.of fluvalinate and.coumaphos in the trapped.pollen ...pollen that had never seen the inside of.a.hive. presumably this has to do.with the wetting of the pollen during collection.

Deknow

How soon after getting the bees did they trap pollen? Maryanne Frazier did speculate that some of the contamination of wax originated from the use of miticides in the hives which produced the package bees.

Re: Can someone please explain the Foundationless hype to me?

WOW!!! After taking about 3 or 4 working days worth of breaks I'm finally through this thread. I must say first off that I haven't read or even looked at the research papers. I honestly don't have the mind for it. I have a hard time following all of the charts that I have looked at in the past so I don't waste my time or frustration trying. I am however using foundationless frames. Why? When I started my wife wanted a "coupon". Well not needing wax foundation was a coupon, but before that I researched and found that there was chemicals in wax and the other issues with bees of the same size. Looking at trachial mites a larger bee would be suspect, however a smaller bee wouldn't. I thought this was interesting. I put God in the equation. If he designed it a certain way then I want to run with that. So I figure that foundationless is the most "natural" way that I could come up with. I haven't done any treatments other than brood breaks, and powdered sugar last year and my few hives are doing well. I like going to my hives and watching one big bee come in and land on a bee that's about 1/3 of the size that is her sister. I find that very cool. If one size takes 1/2 of a day or more longer in the cell that gives varroa that much more time IMO. What's up with the foundationless hype? That's what IMO. It's cheaper, cleaner, and more natural. Is it the best? Well that's what has been discussed at GREAT length by many of you that are much better equipped than I. It seems to be best for ME, but I can't speak for you or anyone else. Commercial is a whole other ball of wax.

Re: Can someone please explain the Foundationless hype to me?

For those who are worried about the chemicals in the plastic wax coating, you could leave your new frames in a sunny window a week or two before putting it in your hive for the same effect.

It is an interesting idea. Couple of things:
You were talked about "hydrolysis". Well, it requires water and some energy to break the chemical bond (refer to organic chemistry course). Water is water, energy usually comes from UV light - it splits H2O and creates aggressive species which attacked the chemical bond and eventually breaks it. So, you need water and UV at the chemical you want to break. Wax is not a water at all! It actually, prevents water from entering (it is called hydrophobic). Similarly, wax works as a shield for UV light.

The bottom line is that this approach may work on VERY thin films of wax at the surface (water from the air and some UV). I would imagine that plastic foundation with VERY thin film of wax (0.2-0.5 g per frame or less) may benefit from the direct sunlight. Not on the "window" - regular glass removes ALL UV - bake frame 10 days on direct sun on one side and than - another 10 days on another side. It would probably decompose 10-20% of bad chemicals (potentially creating new bad species). It would also breaks weaker bonds in your plastic - you sort of will artificially age your frame.

Solar melter probably would not work for the reasons explained above - no water inside the body of wax and possible no UV if ordinary glass used. Remember that you need both - water and UV in the same place at the same time and chemical needs to be here as well.

Good luck with backing frames, looks like a new business is coming - naturally treated foundations!

Note - all above would not work for frames with drawn comb for numerous reasons!
Sergey

Re: Can someone please explain the Foundationless hype to me?

neonic chemicals degrade in two ways hydrolysis (takes up to 3 years per half life) and also via photolysis (half live of 4 hours to a handful of weeks). I was advocating for beeks to harness the power of the sun (not the water) to reduce the concentration of neonics in their hive wax or in the wax coating new plastic frames. My point here is that it's within the grasp of most or all hive keepers to do this themselves if they feel they are concerned about the levels of neonic pesticides in their hive.

When we are talking about new frames, the coating is very tiny so I wouldn't see it being an penatration issue for sunlight. With the solar melter as long as you melt all the wax, I don't see UV penatration being an issue here either.

If you are wanting to photodegrade chemicals, you are correct. I wouldn't recommend using a low-e glass. I've got plenty of evidence in my house that regular glass emits UV rays (faded curtains, furnature, etc). Plastic does work beter than glass in transmitting the full spectrum of UV light. Again, it's nothing that prevents beeks from taking steps on their own here.

It is an interesting idea. Couple of things:
You were talked about "hydrolysis".

Solar melter probably would not work for the reasons explained above - no water inside the body of wax and possible no UV if ordinary glass used. Remember that you need both - water and UV in the same place at the same time and chemical needs to be here as well.